WWW Production Observations

[Denkt]

Lack of resources are very hurtful if it is true that gearing is slowed.

• Const*Sum(es+eg*n):
• es is starting efficiency
• eg is efficiency growth
• n is each production day (I don't know how efficiency growth work so I choice a linear growth for simplicity)

This equation should tell us how much stuff we have produced over a short time (efficiency is still growing and no output techs will be researched) Adding lack of resources modifier (lr) to the equation and we get:

• Const*Sum(lr*(es+lr*eg*n)

The square lr multiplied to efficiency growth will hurt our production alot, it will add up really bad.
Like:

• (2/3)^2 = 4/9
• (1/3)^2 = 1/9

If over a long time eg*n >> es, it is maybe possible with lr being 2/3 to not even produce half of the total of what you could had if you had all needed resources. At the best the penalty is worse then 2/3.

Over a long time with maxed out efficiency the lack of resources penalty will be approximately 2/3. The absolute worst case is if es would be 0 which would give us a penalty of 4/9 while efficiency is growing.

So lack of resources penalty of 2/3 will give us between 4/9 < x < 2/3 of our total production if we did not lack resources with x going towards 2/3 as time goes towards infinity.

 

[domtzs]

Again, Johan was good to pull out the BEF in time, as if the BEF had suffered heavy casualties, his armies may have ended up becoming foot infantry due to lack of TRUCKS! (as it happened in the aftermath of Dunkirk). Having a "Abandon Weapons and Run for your life button" will make the game even more realistic.
Then, we can actually see troops breaking out of "Encirclement" with nothing but the "Experienced men" and having no weapons except pistols and a few rifles. This happened twice to the British in Dunkirk and then again in Greece/Crete.
The Russians did this time and again in 1941-42 and the Germans did this in 1942-44 period several times.

also equipment loss in general depends on who remains in position of the field. IIRC in north Africa the DAK managed to repair repeatedly their precious tanks during their offensives because they could actually bring repair crews to the damaged vehicles in the field. Of course all this changed during the retreat, and losses in materiel sky-rocketed (Rommel got chewed up because of it when he basically asked for a full refit of his forces). Winning a battle with 1k loss in personnel and losing one with the same number of casualties should really result in massive equipment loss differences.

 

[Denkt]

Equipment capturing have been confirmed to be in the game but I don't know in which form. Like it could be so that you capture equipment from defeating enemy division but it could be so that you only capture equipment then you annex a country.

 

[shri]

also equipment loss in general depends on who remains in position of the field. IIRC in north Africa the DAK managed to repair repeatedly their precious tanks during their offensives because they could actually bring repair crews to the damaged vehicles in the field. Of course all this changed during the retreat, and losses in materiel sky-rocketed (Rommel got chewed up because of it when he basically asked for a full refit of his forces). Winning a battle with 1k loss in personnel and losing one with the same number of casualties should really result in massive equipment loss differences.

The Germans till late 1942-early 1943 were on the "strategic offensive" on all fronts they faced and this is the main reason why their - equipment losses pre- Stalingrad/Kursk etc are so low. The repair crews being able to repair damaged vehicles fast and make them up and running was actually the brainchild of Guderian in his writings in the 1930s and the German army implemented it. Rommel did not invent this, despite the Allies crediting him with this, it was a doctrine of the Panzerschiffe (Armored Troops formations).
From 1943 onward, they were on the Strategic defensive and thus, equipment losses skyrocket everywhere leading to severe paucity despite tremendous increase in production in 1943-44 period. Showcasing this without disturbing "game balance" will be very tricky.

 

[Denkt]

I think nearly every commander understood that it is easier to recover equipment if you cover ground.

 

[Tartan Spartan]

I think nearly every commander understood that it is easier to recover equipment if you cover ground.

Retreating units should both move fast but suffer significant attrition of both men and materiel.

But on the topic of production is there any impact of a 1x15 line vs. 15x1?

 

[panzerzombie]

Retreating units should both move fast but suffer significant attrition of both men and materiel.

But on the topic of production is there any impact of a 1x15 line vs. 15x1?

There - should* - be no difference if 1x15 or 15 x1. 15x1 is sure messy but for me preferably due to flexibility.

*(didn´t read anything to the contrary)

 

[Starisc]

There - should* - be no difference if 1x15 or 15 x1. 15x1 is sure messy but for me preferably due to flexibility.

*(didn´t read anything to the contrary)

1. Does anybody know if gearing rate increase is tied to number of factories in a production queue?
2.. And does adding more factories to a production queue reduce gearing?

Otherwise it would be quite gamey to start with some more 1x1 production queues for equipment, which will be needed later, when you could just increase factories to 15 and enjoy the already accumulated gearing without the switching cost penalty.

 

[panzerzombie]

1. Does anybody know if gearing rate increase is tied to number of factories in a production queue?
2.. And does adding more factories to a production queue reduce gearing?

Otherwise it would be quite gamey to start with some more 1x1 production queues for equipment, which will be needed later, when you could just increase factories to 15 and enjoy the already accumulated gearing without the switching cost penalty.

1. Each factory is monitored seperately and the overall efficiency is the average of them. It was said that eff gain is not accelerated by more factories.
2. If you add a fresh factory(=10%eff) the overal eff drops ( like 1 x 80% + 1 x 10% = 2 x 45% )

 

[panzerzombie]

Don´t know if this thread is still monitored but I just found the cost for mobile rocket artillery ( WWW4) with 15 IC / 1 Steel / 1 Rubber / 1 Oil

weird thing is that the Rocket Artillery itself needs 5 IC 1 Steel / 2 Tungsten and a single Truck costs 2,5 IC and 1 Rubber / 1 Oil

doesn´t fit yet, beta balance pending...^^

 

[lodgers]

i personally think HOI4 gearing and other ratios are being used well to showcase the war as it happened in RL.
Just because Tiger Tanks were researched, did not mean your whole Panzer forces became Tigers in 3 months. That was the main issue with HOI3 and previous variants.

Also, pre-war stockpiling followed by up-gradation in 1940 method, done by many players will backfire. Eg: Johann built a lot of "Useless fighters" in early game before reaching the "Spitfire" and hence, he had more fighters in game, but not necessarily better ones and thus did not gain air superiority.
The Germans have the Bf-109 from 1936 on-wards and can keep producing the same (with upgraded variants of level 5 say) till end of the War and still have a decent fighter in 1944-45 (as it was in RL).

Again, Germany starts with the Lousy PzII and needs to research PzIII fast and mass produce it, however, i am not sure if i am really going to mass produce PzIV if i get it in 1941, as i need more tanks for barbarossa, not necessarily better ones. Again, a level 5 variant of PzIII maybe a better bet than a slowly produced PzIV (as i may end up on the gates of Moscow with no Tank reserves).

Infantry Weapons 1,2,3 also have these extremely useful Push Me- Pull You situations. This is what makes a great and interesting game. Now, if Balance issues are worked out, HOI4 will turn out to be an excellent game.

Again, Johan was good to pull out the BEF in time, as if the BEF had suffered heavy casualties, his armies may have ended up becoming foot infantry due to lack of TRUCKS! (as it happened in the aftermath of Dunkirk). Having a "Abandon Weapons and Run for your life button" will make the game even more realistic.
Then, we can actually see troops breaking out of "Encirclement" with nothing but the "Experienced men" and having no weapons except pistols and a few rifles. This happened twice to the British in Dunkirk and then again in Greece/Crete.
The Russians did this time and again in 1941-42 and the Germans did this in 1942-44 period several times.

Im still trying to figure out how they got the Bismark as 1940 techline?

 

[lodgers]

1. Each factory is monitored seperately and the overall efficiency is the average of them. It was said that eff gain is not accelerated by more factories.
2. If you add a fresh factory(=10%eff) the overal eff drops ( like 1 x 80% + 1 x 10% = 2 x 45% )

Ah, that's a question I had for those who like to exploit. So you cannot have 1 factory building efficiency bonus and then add 14 more and still have max bonus, it's an average?

 

[lodgers]

1. Each factory is monitored seperately and the overall efficiency is the average of them. It was said that eff gain is not accelerated by more factories.
2. If you add a fresh factory(=10%eff) the overal eff drops ( like 1 x 80% + 1 x 10% = 2 x 45% )

LOL, your math is a little off, but I get the id

Best estimate of how production works based on the WWW videos.

Production Factors
Factory production: 5 IC per factory per day
Max Gearing Bonus: Starts at 50% and goes to 100%
Min Gearing Bonus: Appears to be 10%
Production Bonus: Starts at 5% with Germany and goes to 95% in WWW10
Resource Availability: Value of 1.0 if all material is available

Example 1
The year is 1940 and Germany has 1936 fighter technology, an 80% max gearing bonus, and a 65% production bonus. Germany has 15 factories producing the BF109 which has an IC cost of 22. All resources are available for the 15 factories (15 oil, 15 rubber, 30 aluminum). The factories have been running for some time and have reached max efficiency

Planes Built =( 15 factories x 5 IC per factory x 0.80 gearing x 1.65 bonus x 1.0 resource) / (22 IC per plane) = 4.5 planes per day

Example 2
The player wants to double production of planes so he changes his 15 factory tank line over to BF109. Germany has all necessary resources for the production line (15 oil, 15 rubber, 30 aluminum). The new production line produces far less:

Planes Built =(15 factories x 5 IC per factory x 0.10 gearing x 1.65 bonus x 1.0 resource) / (22 IC per plane) = 0.56 planes per day

Additional Notes
1. Naval production: Dockyards do not have gearing bonus. Dockyards are showing 2.5 IC per factory production
2. Resource Impact: This value appears to change as they are balancing the game. As of WWW10, production is at 55% for one missing resource (1 of 2, or 2 of 3) and 35% for 2 missing resources (1 of 3). Penalty for having no resources is unknown.
3. Cost increase over time: It appears that newer technology results in increased costs. It was pretty evident with ships (SS1 to SS2 went from 1000 to 11000, and BB1 to BB2 went from 14k to 15.4k). Artillery level 2 also increased to 5 (over 4 in 1939, and 2 in 1936)
4. Cost decrease over time: It appears that some older technology gets cheaper over time. Infantry weapons 1 costs 0.75 in 1936. When infantry weapons 2 is researched, it costs 0.75, but level 1 decreased to 0.5.
5. Gearing Rate: The tool tip showed a 1.7% increase (per week). That translates to a 41 week time period to go from 10% to 80%. The dev diary indicates an S curve, so it may not be that bad if that number represents the flat part of the curve.
6. Variant Cost: It appears that variants and versions (AA, Artillery, etc.) use the same cost as the base unit (i.e. Medium tank costs 12 so the Medium Tank Destroyer costs 12). But it should be noted that the resource cost goes up significantly.
7. Gearing loss: Appears to be a 50% penalty from switching production lines to a newer version
8. Reliability/Loss: Not enough information to project reliability needs on production. But a quick approximation shows that Germany went from +3k infantry weapons to -7k infantry weapons after losing 500k men. A 100% infantry to equipment ratio would show a 50k equipment need instead of 10k. So it looks like it is a 20% weapon loss ratio.




Cost Reference
1. Infantry Weapons: 1936 INF1 costs 0.75IC + 2 steel. INF2 costs 0.75IC + 4 steel. INF1 cost reduced to 0.5IC + 2 steel when INF2 researched.
2. Support: 1936 Support is 2IC + 2 Steel + 1 aluminum. By 1938 the cost increased to 4IC.
3. Artillery: 1936 Artillery costs 2IC + 2 steel + 1 Tung. By 1938 the cost increased to 4IC. ART2 cost increased to 5IC.
4. Light Tanks: 1934 Light tank tech shown as 11IC + 2 Steel + 1 oil. In 1940, the light tank cost is shown to be 9IC.
5. Medium Tanks: 1940 medium tanks shown as 12IC + 2 steel + 1 oil + 2 Tun
6. Heavy Tanks: 1937 heavy tanks shown as 50IC + 3 Steel + 1 oil + 3 Tun. Cost decreased to 25IC in 1940.
7. 1936 Planes: Fighter 22, CAS 22, NAV 26, TAC 35, Carrier -F 26.4, Carrier -NAV 31.2. All require 2 aluminum + 1 oil + 1 rubber
8. 1936 4 engine: STR 60IC, TRAN 180IC. Both require 3 aluminum + 1 oil + 2 rubber
9. Motorized: 2.5IC + 1 rubber + 1 oil
10. Mechanized: 10 IC + 2Steel + 1 oil + 1 rubber
11. Navy 1: Convoy 70 +1S+1O, SS 1000+1S+1O, DD 1300+2S+1O, LC4200+2S+1O, HC 5600+3S+1O+1CH, BC 10k+3S+1O, CA 11k+3S+1O+1CH, BB 14.4k+3S+1O+1CH
12. AA: 1936 costs 2IC+ 2steel. In 1938 increased to 4IC
13. Tank Destroyer: 1940 Med TD cost of 12IC w/ unknown resources
14. SP Artillery: 1940 Light Artillery 11IC w/ unknown resources, 1940 med Artillery 15 IC w/ 1R+ 1Oil + 1Steel

Unit Requirement Reference
1. Infantry = 100 inf weapons
2. Motorized = 50 mot + 100 inf
3. Light Tank = 60 tanks
4. Mountaineers = 140 inf
5. Recon = 40 inf + 10 support
6. Engineer = 10 inf + 30 support
7. Artillery = 24 artillery
8. Hospital = 20 mot + 30 support
9. Heavy tank = 40 tanks
10. Signal company = 10 mot + 50 support
11. Tank destroyer = 20 TD
12. AA = 16 AA
13. SP Artillery = 20 Light Artillery

Damn fine post! How accurate are your numbers? I really wish they didn't have so much rubber for planes, they don't use that much vs even tanks.

 

[Sun_Killer]

Damn fine post! How accurate are your numbers? I really wish they didn't have so much rubber for planes, they don't use that much vs even tanks.

I think you underestimated how much rubber a plane needs. You have some tires for the landing gears, a lots of sealings, vibration dampanpers and the biggest chunk self-sealing fuel tanks. Which was nothing elese than a rubber-couting of the entire tank with between 4-7 mm of rubber depending on the technic.

What would be more interesting would be do create plane versions without self-sealing tanks. There by reducing the rubber cost by half but getting a big reliabilty hit, maybe some more speed and range too because of less weigth.

 

[Novatheorem]

What would be more interesting would be do create plane versions without self-sealing tanks. There by reducing the rubber cost by half but getting a big reliabilty hit, maybe some more speed and range too because of less weigth.

Sounds like something that would go in a realism mod... HPP or BICE, maybe?